AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 and NVIDIA P102-100 are two end-of-life GPUs that split their two common benchmark comparisons almost exactly down the middle, with one win each. The AMD card dominates in OpenCL compute by a wide 24.9% margin, while the NVIDIA card edges ahead in Vulkan by a slim 2.1%. This creates a clear use-case division: the Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the compute-oriented workstation part, whereas the P102-100 is a mining-focused card that happens to hold a narrow graphics-API advantage. Their average benchmark scores reinforce this split — the AMD card averages 63,693 points (89th percentile) against the NVIDIA card’s 58,528 points (88th percentile), a gap of roughly 8.8% in favor of AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the clear winner for OpenCL workloads, which typically include general-purpose GPU compute, rendering, and scientific applications. Its OpenCL score of 61,930 versus the P102-100’s 49,602 represents a 24.9% advantage — a substantial lead that dwarfs any other difference between these two cards. This margin places the Vega 56 in a different performance tier for compute tasks, and its average benchmark score of 63,693 confirms it as the more consistently capable overall performer.

The NVIDIA P102-100 takes the Vulkan crown, scoring 67,454 against the Vega 56’s 66,004. That 2.1% delta is narrow enough to be considered a statistical tie in many real-world scenarios, but it does indicate that the Pascal architecture handles Vulkan API workloads slightly better. The P102-100’s Vulkan score is also its best result across both tested benchmarks, suggesting that this card is optimized for graphics-API-driven tasks rather than raw compute.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the percentile rankings tell the broader story. The Vega 56 sits at the 89th percentile of all GPUs, while the P102-100 sits at the 88th — a one-percentile difference that reflects the AMD card’s higher average score. The nearest rivals for each card confirm their positioning: the Vega 56 trades blows with the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775, -0.1%) and RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, -0.2%), while the P102-100 sits alongside the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657, -0.2%) and RX 6950 XT (58,392, +0.2%). In short, the Vega 56 competes in a higher performance bracket.

Architecture Differences

These two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA P102-100 uses the GP102 chip on Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The node difference is small but real — AMD’s 14 nm process is slightly more advanced than NVIDIA’s 16 nm, though both are mature nodes by modern standards.

Transistor counts are nearly identical: 12,500 million for AMD versus 11,800 million for NVIDIA, a difference of about 5.9%. Die sizes are similarly close at 495 mm² for the Vega 10 and 471 mm² for the GP102, making transistor density nearly equivalent at 25.3M / mm² versus 25.1M / mm². The architectural divergence shows up in the compute units: the Vega 56 packs 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the P102-100 has 3,200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. AMD leads in shading and texture hardware, but NVIDIA has 25% more ROPs.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The P102-100 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus, delivering 440.3 GB/s. Despite the smaller bus, the NVIDIA card achieves higher bandwidth thanks to faster memory clocks (11 Gbps effective versus 1572 Mbps effective for AMD). However, the Vega 56 has 60% more memory capacity, which matters for large datasets.

Clock speeds heavily favor NVIDIA. The P102-100 runs at a 1582 MHz base and 1683 MHz boost, while the Vega 56 is at 1138 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. This clock advantage drives NVIDIA’s higher pixel rate (134.6 GPixel/s versus 80.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (336.6 GTexel/s versus 280.0 GTexel/s). Yet AMD still leads in FP32 compute at 8.960 TFLOPS versus 10.77 TFLOPS for NVIDIA — a counterintuitive result explained by the Vega 56’s wider shading unit count. In FP16, the gap is enormous: AMD delivers 17.92 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) while NVIDIA delivers only 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a 100x difference that makes the Vega 56 vastly superior for half-precision workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL benchmark is where the Radeon Pro Vega 56 delivers its knockout punch. Scoring 61,930 against the P102-100’s 49,602, the AMD card wins by 24.9%. This is not a marginal victory — it is a decisive performance gap that places the Vega 56 in a different category for OpenCL compute. The margin is so large that it exceeds the entire average score difference between the two cards (63,693 versus 58,528), meaning the OpenCL result is the primary driver of the Vega 56’s higher average.

The Vulkan benchmark flips the script, but only slightly. The NVIDIA P102-100 scores 67,454 against the Vega 56’s 66,004, winning by 2.1%. This is a narrow margin that falls well within typical run-to-run variance for GPU benchmarks. It does, however, show that the P102-100 is not entirely outclassed — its Pascal architecture handles the Vulkan API efficiently enough to overcome the AMD card’s raw compute advantages. Notably, the P102-100’s Vulkan score is its strongest result, while the Vega 56’s Vulkan score is its strongest result as well (66,004 versus 63,145 in Metal and 61,930 in OpenCL).

The Vega 56 also has a Metal benchmark score of 63,145, which the P102-100 cannot match because it has no Metal test result. This adds another data point to the AMD card’s broader software support and compute versatility. Across the three benchmarks where the Vega 56 has results, its scores range from 61,930 to 66,004, a spread of about 6.6%. The P102-100’s two scores range from 49,602 to 67,454, a spread of 36% — indicating that its performance is highly workload-dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 averages 63,693 points, while the NVIDIA P102-100 averages 58,528 points. That is a difference of about 8.8% in favor of AMD.

Q: How much faster is the AMD card in OpenCL?

A: The Vega 56 scores 61,930 in OpenCL versus the P102-100’s 49,602, a 24.9% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the P102-100 wins the Vulkan test with 67,454 points against the Vega 56’s 66,004, a 2.1% margin.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory, while the P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X. The AMD card offers 60% more capacity.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The P102-100 delivers 440.3 GB/s, slightly ahead of the Vega 56’s 402.4 GB/s, despite using a 320-bit bus versus AMD’s 2048-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP and uses no external power connectors (it is an integrated graphics package). The P102-100 has a 250 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 | NVIDIA P102-100 |

|---------------|------------------------|-----------------|

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 16 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 11,800 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1138 MHz | 1582 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1250 MHz | 1683 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 5 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 2048 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 440.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 3200 |

| TMUs | 224 | 200 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| FP32 Compute | 8.960 TFLOPS | 10.77 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 17.92 TFLOPS (2:1) | 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| Pixel Rate | 80.00 GPixel/s | 134.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 280.0 GTexel/s | 336.6 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 210 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| Length | Not specified | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Release Date | 2017-08-13 | 2018-02-11 |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split decision. For anyone running OpenCL compute workloads, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the unequivocal choice — its 24.9% OpenCL advantage is decisive, and its higher average score (63,693 versus 58,528) confirms it as the more capable overall card. The Vega 56 also brings 8 GB of HBM2 memory, 60% more capacity, and vastly superior FP16 performance (17.92 TFLOPS versus 168.3 GFLOPS), making it the better option for compute-heavy tasks that benefit from half-precision arithmetic.

The NVIDIA P102-100, however, is not without merit. Its Vulkan score of 67,454 edges out the Vega 56, and its higher clocks (1683 MHz boost versus 1250 MHz) deliver superior pixel and texture rates. It also has more ROPs (80 versus 64) and higher memory bandwidth (440.3 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s). But these advantages are narrow and workload-specific, and they come with significant trade-offs: no display outputs, a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and a card designed explicitly for mining rather than general-purpose use.

The verdict is straightforward: the Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the better all-around GPU based on benchmark data, with a higher average score, a dominant OpenCL lead, and broader software support (including Metal). The P102-100 is a specialized mining card that happens to hold a slight Vulkan edge, but its lower average score and niche design make it a poor choice for anything beyond its intended purpose. Choose the Vega 56 for compute and general workloads; choose the P102-100 only if Vulkan performance at the expense of everything else is your priority.